lappa

Unfortunately Nix-Gui hasn't yet achieved it's tagline. Hopefully https://github.com/nix-gui/nix-gui/issues/77 letting users configure a predefined list of options relevant to completing a task will bring us closer to that goal.

Seems that he wants pypi and pip to be the exclusive distribution mechanisms for his project. He wants to avoid handling bugs that come from his project being packaged through other means.

He misunderstands how nixos works and suggests that Home Assistant will be able to install his package via pip on nixos.

>People pay software engineers higher wages because of the risk of them leaving and taking all of their domain knowledge with them

Why is it that software engineers tend to get substantial raises by changing companies while receiving only small raises when they stay at the same company?

Similar project: http://e-basteln.de/other/stm/overview/

In that case, why have proof of stake at all? Wouldn't it be simpler to just have the set of oracles alone facilitate the currency, since they already effectively have the power to?

The SEC supported the validity of LTSEs Voting Rights Policy [0]. Eric Reis has clarified time-phase voting won't be mandatory [1], however the LTSE is facilitating technological / legal support for the implementation of such voting structures without directly endorsing them (presumably for legal reasons) [2].

>Also, would this apply only to securities actually listed on LTSE or also, somehow, to non-LTSE listed securities bought on LTSE (which apparently is the only thing possible to do so far(.

Their rulebook disallows unfair dilution of other classes of shares.

[0] https://www.sec.gov/rules/other/2019/34-85828.pdf

>the Council of Institutional Investors (“CII”) advised that it could not support LTSE’s Form 1 application for two reasons. First, CII stated that the corporate governance requirements in LTSE’s Form 1 application (specifically, its “Voting Rights Policy”176) would “permit newly public companies to have multi-class structures with unequal voting rights in conflict with [CII’s] membership approved policies supporting a one share, one vote structure” with “no sunsets on such structures.”177 Second, CII stated that LTSE’s Form 1 application “does not include any information about LTSE’s reported plans to update its application to include time-phased voting rights as a core element of its proposed corporate governance listing standards.”178 In addition, CII set forth its concerns about time-phased voting rights, including disproportionate empowerment of long-term stakeholders and challenges in tracking ownership of those with super-voting rights.

>The issues raised in the CII Letter do not provide a basis for the Commission to reject LTSE’s Form 1 application. Commission rules do not mandate that the rules of a national securities exchange must provide for a “one share, one vote” requirement for listed issuers.

[1] https://qz.com/1901336/eric-ries-long-term-stock-exchange-ai...

[2] https://ltse.com/faq/

> No. The exchange’s rules do not take a position on enhanced voting rights for shareholders. Our software affiliate, LTSE Services, has designed a tool to facilitate enhanced voting, should a company choose on its own to implement that.

IMO, the main difference between LTSE and a traditional stock exchange is the way votes are allocated to shareholders. Traditionally voting power is proportional to shares owned. However, on LTSE the amount of time a stock has been held is also considered.

There is no minimum holding period, but there is an incentive to hold.

A bit of a tangent: Since there is a premium in voting rights (GOOG vs GOOGL), I'm curious to see how this new voting structure might result in strange behavior by traders and investors. For example, will people use single stock futures to hedge while retaining their voting rights? Will special purpose vehicles for holding shares be created?

>I think the difference is that the West is engaging in surveillance and not sabotage.

This isn't true though. Pretty much all countries with the capability and incentives to perform cyber attacks do, including the US. For example,

US attacks on Russian power grid: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/15/us/politics/trump-cyber-r...

US attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuxnet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Olympic_Games

>I love org mode (with evil for vim goodness), but the one problem I really wish was easier is image support.

Yes, inline images are an important part of rich documents. I'm not sure what you're looking for in terms of images, but I've written this function which allows you to paste images directly from the clipboard into documents:

https://paste.debian.net/plain/1144961

IMO, your demo site could be improved by having some widgets created in advance.

Because it's deceptive to call it "Bitcoin" Cash, because it's not Bitcoin. It's confusing to people who want to buy real bitcoins.

Yes, they share a blockchain history until a certain point. If your Bitcoins were sent in a transaction belonging to a block prior to the split, you own both BCash and Bitcoin.

Or get an ad blocker or use the browser being discussed. Regardless of your desire for websites to be able to serve ads, the users are mostly in control of whether they want to see the ads.

no subscription mirror: http://www.cetusnews.com/life/Forever-Young--Tech-Startups--...

I don't follow your argument. You are saying that because we have nearly a tree structure within the workplace, the Internet will approximately have nearly tree structure?

Seems that it's just a matter if the most efficient structure being this way for both cases rather than us mimicking the workplace in the structuring of the Internet.

Can I get more info on this?

Has he treaded carefully on twitter avoiding breaking the TOS? I imagine that, a- with the Milo ban, they wait for you to do something arguably in TOS violation if they want to get rid of you.

Why do you believe it has to be the first AGI? Why does the current state of their data centers matter? It seems a bit like saying "we don't have to worry about nukes being used by the Russians, do they even have centrifuges sufficient to create one?"

And what happens when it's creators are terrorists?

Archived version https://archive.nyafuu.org/n/thread/1050512

I just did this, the results don't seem very different.

Are you implying that chefs at fancy restaurants don't love to cook?

Agents are expensive overhead. Agents are for people who shift between "clients" frequently. The thing that both actors and athletes share (at least the ones with agents) is giant salaries and a frequently changing employer.

His example demonstrates that determining causality avoids problems such as the inability to recognize other relevant correlations.

Is it better to meditate with the sound of rain as provided with quietkit, or no sound at all?

"To qualify as HEPA by US government standards, an air filter must remove (from the air that passes through) 99.97% of particles that have a size of 0.3 µm."

Carbon monoxide is a few orders of magnitude too small to be caught by a HEPA filter, in fact a filter that could filter CO would filter oxygen and nitrogen as well. Such a filter would just be a pump.

There, however, exists a patent for a filter for CO, it works by converting the CO to CO2: https://www.google.com/patents/US5564065

This really doesn't make any sense.

>blockchains introduced three new characteristics: centralized / shared control, immutable / audit trails, and native assets / exchanges.

Blockchains aren't immutable, they are just expensive to mutate.

Blockchains aren't centralized.

Blockchains didn't introduce audit trails, these have always been possible simply through having a transaction table that is only appended to. This of course does require trust in the central authority.

>(4) Leads to provenance on training/testing data & models, to improve the trustworthiness of the data & models. Data wants reputation too.

Is training set fraud really an issue in training AI?

>(1) Leads to more data, and therefore better models. >(2) Leads to qualitatively new data, and therefore qualitatively new models. >(3) Allows for shared control of AI training data & models.

The author has a poor understanding of both AI and blockchain technology[1]. Blockchains are for decentralized consensus, but it seems the author is vaguely proposing using a blockchain as a mass datastore (with ownership labels) for both training data and AI algorithms.

Of course AI is an exciting field so this means you can generate hype by implying the field of AI has yet to solve the problem of sharing data with fellow researchers until now.

[1] https://download.wpsoftware.net/bitcoin/alts.pdf

Did you feel you had less energy, even in the beginning of this diet?

      Energy Source		Subsidy per kwh	 Externalities per kwh

      Coal			$0.0006		~$0.02

      Natural Gas	        $0.0006		~$0.01

      Nuclear			$0.0031		(unspecified)

      Renewables		$0.0154		(unspecified)

            Biomass Power	$0.0020		(unspecified)

            Geothermal		$0.0125		(unspecified)

            Hydroelectric	$0.0008		(unspecified)

            Solar		$0.9680		(unspecified)

            Wind		$0.0525		(unspecified)

http://environmentblog.ncpa.org/which-energy-source-receives...